Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Bob Schmidt <schmidt () provider com>
Date: February 16, 2010 5:37:24 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks

Dave, for IP if you wish,

A couple of observations about Google's broadband project that I haven't seen mentioned here (or elsewhere for that 
matter).

1. Google is in effect letting the reverse of what would ordinarily be (or would have in the past been) a municipal RFP 
for a cable system. Instead of the city asking cable companies for a bid, Google is asking the cities. This is rather 
remarkable and I'm not sure it has ever been done before in either the phone or cable industries. Whether for cherry 
picking will remain to be seen or it could be that Google is attempting to estimate near term total market potential 
based on the number of responses it receives.

2. As to its capability to actually execute, build out and service the system(s), I believe it is entirely possible 
that rather than take on the executional piece itself,  Google may simply sub out these tasks to an experienced 
broadband partner, who knows, perhaps with one of its cell phone partners like Verizon with whom it already has a 
co-optition-like (cooperative/competitve) relationship on the phone side.

Consider that the "love to hate" feeling about the phone company and the cable company currently far exceeds the same 
feeling about Google and we can see that a customer facing Google brand with lots of goodwill could well be combined 
with service level standards consistent with Google brand standards where Google holds the traditional phable 
(phone/cable) companies accountable through a commercial relationship that creates levels of customer satisfaction that 
no municipal franchise or state utility commission has been able to achieve. Crazy? Perhaps, but I would not consider 
it out of the realm of possibility.


Bob Schmidt
Provider Marketing Group
Orlando, FL



At 08:43 AM 2/15/2010, you wrote:

> > From: "Bill Stewart" <bill.stewart () pobox com>
> > To: <dave () farber net>, <ip () v2 listbox com>
> > Date: February 14, 2010 11:50:11 PM EST
> > Subject: [IP] Google Plans to Build Ultra High-Speed Broadband Networks
> >
> > > Now, with respect to whether Google will cherry pick locations,
> > > I believe it is only fair to wait and see before passing judgment.
> >
> > Of course they'll cherry pick; there's really no alternative.
> > First of all, they'll need to build in areas where they think
> > they can find a market (though their perceptions of what kind
> > of market to pursue may be different from other CLECs or ILECs,
> > which is a Good Thing.)  They'd be fools to start by trying to
> > compete for Brett Glass's Lariat.net rural wireless customers,
> > for example, as opposed to a densely packed city or suburb,
> > though they might well decide to start with an area that
> > isn't already served by Verizon FIOS or AT&T Uverse,
> > or where they think they can beat the local Cable TV carrier.
> >
> > But also, local regulations can have a huge impact on
> > choices of markets.  Some cities or counties place
> > unsustainable burdens on construction, or insist on an
> > unreasonable fraction of revenue for business fiber builds,
> > or run their own municipal fiber and are hostile to competition,
> > or have geographical problems like rivers and freeways
> > (and bureaucratic obstacles to crossing the freeways.)
> >
> > If you remember the early 80s, when cable TV was being built
> > town by town, the important issues often weren't which company
> > had a far-reaching vision for the future of communications,
> > but which city council member's brother-in-law would get the
> > paving contract or how many free public access channels there'd be.
> > The FCC and state PUCs have reduced the power of local governments
> > to interfere, but street construction is still street construction,
> > and poles and conduits often have complex ownership and usage limitations.
> >
> > As far as customer service goes, I was a Netcom customer when they
> > were growing from 10,000 subscribers in the mid 90s to 100,000,
> > and on-hold times could be 45 minutes some years...
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com





-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com